1 / 16

Bayesian networks

Bayesian networks. Chapter 14 Section 1 – 2. Outline. Syntax Semantics. Bayesian networks. A simple, graphical notation for conditional independence assertions and hence for compact specification of full joint distributions Syntax: a set of nodes, one per variable

colman
Download Presentation

Bayesian networks

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Bayesian networks Chapter 14 Section 1 – 2

  2. Outline • Syntax • Semantics

  3. Bayesian networks • A simple, graphical notation for conditional independence assertions and hence for compact specification of full joint distributions • Syntax: • a set of nodes, one per variable • a directed, acyclic graph (link ≈ "directly influences") • a conditional distribution for each node given its parents: P (Xi | Parents (Xi)) • In the simplest case, conditional distribution represented as a conditional probability table (CPT) giving the distribution over Xi for each combination of parent values

  4. Example • Topology of network encodes conditional independence assertions: • Weather is independent of the other variables • Toothache and Catch are conditionally independent given Cavity

  5. Example • I'm at work, neighbor John calls to say my alarm is ringing, but neighbor Mary doesn't call. Sometimes it's set off by minor earthquakes. Is there a burglar? • Variables: Burglary, Earthquake, Alarm, JohnCalls, MaryCalls • Network topology reflects "causal" knowledge: • A burglar can set the alarm off • An earthquake can set the alarm off • The alarm can cause Mary to call • The alarm can cause John to call

  6. Example contd.

  7. Compactness • A CPT for Boolean Xi with k Boolean parents has 2k rows for the combinations of parent values • Each row requires one number p for Xi = true(the number for Xi = false is just 1-p) • If each variable has no more than k parents, the complete network requires O(n · 2k) numbers • I.e., grows linearly with n, vs. O(2n)for the full joint distribution • For burglary net, 1 + 1 + 4 + 2 + 2 = 10 numbers (vs. 25-1 = 31)

  8. Semantics The full joint distribution is defined as the product of the local conditional distributions: P (X1, … ,Xn) = πi = 1P (Xi | Parents(Xi)) e.g., P(j  m  a b e) = P (j | a) P (m | a) P (a | b, e) P (b) P (e) n

  9. Constructing Bayesian networks • 1. Choose an ordering of variables X1, … ,Xn • 2. For i = 1 to n • add Xi to the network • select parents from X1, … ,Xi-1 such that P (Xi | Parents(Xi)) = P (Xi | X1, ... Xi-1) This choice of parents guarantees: P (X1, … ,Xn) = πi =1P (Xi | X1, … , Xi-1) (chain rule) = πi =1P (Xi | Parents(Xi)) (by construction) n n

  10. Example • Suppose we choose the ordering M, J, A, B, E P(J | M) = P(J)?

  11. Example • Suppose we choose the ordering M, J, A, B, E P(J | M) = P(J)? No P(A | J, M) = P(A | J)?P(A | J, M) = P(A)?

  12. Example • Suppose we choose the ordering M, J, A, B, E P(J | M) = P(J)? No P(A | J, M) = P(A | J)?P(A | J, M) = P(A)? No P(B | A, J, M) = P(B | A)? P(B | A, J, M) = P(B)?

  13. Example • Suppose we choose the ordering M, J, A, B, E P(J | M) = P(J)? No P(A | J, M) = P(A | J)?P(A | J, M) = P(A)? No P(B | A, J, M) = P(B | A)? Yes P(B | A, J, M) = P(B)? No P(E | B, A ,J, M) = P(E | A)? P(E | B, A, J, M) = P(E | A, B)?

  14. Example • Suppose we choose the ordering M, J, A, B, E P(J | M) = P(J)? No P(A | J, M) = P(A | J)?P(A | J, M) = P(A)? No P(B | A, J, M) = P(B | A)? Yes P(B | A, J, M) = P(B)? No P(E | B, A ,J, M) = P(E | A)? No P(E | B, A, J, M) = P(E | A, B)? Yes

  15. Example contd. • Deciding conditional independence is hard in noncausal directions • (Causal models and conditional independence seem hardwired for humans!) • Network is less compact: 1 + 2 + 4 + 2 + 4 = 13 numbers needed

  16. Summary • Bayesian networks provide a natural representation for (causally induced) conditional independence • Topology + CPTs = compact representation of joint distribution • Generally easy for domain experts to construct

More Related